[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5045E387.4030103@redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 04 Sep 2012 13:18:31 +0200
From: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@...hat.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
CC: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org, rusty@...tcorp.com.au, jasowang@...hat.com,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>,
target-devel <target-devel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] virtio-scsi: introduce multiqueue support
Il 04/09/2012 13:09, Michael S. Tsirkin ha scritto:
>> > queuecommand on CPU #0 queuecommand #2 on CPU #1
>> > --------------------------------------------------------------
>> > atomic_inc_return(...) == 1
>> > atomic_inc_return(...) == 2
>> > virtscsi_queuecommand to queue #1
>> > tgt->req_vq = queue #0
>> > virtscsi_queuecommand to queue #0
>> >
>> > then two requests are issued to different queues without a quiescent
>> > point in the middle.
> What happens then? Does this break correctness?
Yes, requests to the same target should be processed in FIFO order, or
you have things like a flush issued before the write it was supposed to
flush. This is why I can only change the queue when there is no request
pending.
Paolo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists